> My original plan was to admire the book a bit when I was finished scanning, but midway I was reasonably frightened of the thing and only finished the job out of sheer determination, which is why the quality is universally poor. When I was done I returned it to where I took it from immediately.

Yes, I'm getting "The item is not available due to issues with the item's content." as well. Probably they didn't really have the rights to post it on the internet, so it's been taken down, or else they're making sure it's allowed to be up.

As an ordained man of the cloth who was once legitimately (and amusingly) confused by a toddler as actually being Jesus, I find your prose to be insulting.

But at the same time: If you do not like my fishing instructions, then please feel free to fish as you see fit.

Meanwhile, you've got the etymology all wrong:

It was 1991, and someone told me I should use a fictitious handle when using BBSs.

"Why?"

"Because everyone else does."

"Hmm." Fiction? Me? Meh.

But I found an MS-DOS-based "random" freeware DND character name generator, pressed enter a bunch of times to get rid of the chaff and the obvious nonsense, and eventually landed at "Adolf Osborne" as an output.

Meanwhile, the name has simply stuck. And while the vast majority of folks ignore it (it's just a name), I've found it useful over the years as a means to further separate the chaff: Those who find themselves afraid of the name simply have very thin skin, which is ok. Those who poke fun of it have thicker skin and perhaps a sense of humor, which is even better. Those who actively take offense of it are simply weak, and are worthy of no praise from any person at any time for any deed, ever.

I think that you're in the latter of those three groups, given your most recent verbiage.

But it's your call.

(I do find it a bit amusing that your fishing has improved a bit given my meager lesson, though, whatever the case.)